The Companion Curriculum: medical students’ perceptions of the integration of humanities within medical education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The contributions of arts and humanities to medical education are known in the medical education community, but medical schools' offerings vary. The Companion Curriculum (CC) is a student-curated set of optional humanities content for medical students at the University of Toronto. This study evaluates integration of the CC to identify key enabling conditions for medical humanities engagement. Methods: A mixed-methods evaluation gauged usage and perceptions of integration of the CC among medical students using an online survey and focus groups. Narrative data underwent thematic analysis, supported by summary statistics of quantitative data. Results: = 67/130; 52%), and, once prompted with a description, 14% had discussed it in their tutorial groups. Of students using the CC, 80% reported learning something new regarding their roles as communicators and health advocates. Themes were the perceived value of the humanities, internal student barriers, institutional neglect of the humanities, and student critiques and recommendations. Conclusion: Despite participants' interest in medical humanities, our CC remains underused. To improve humanities' visibility in the MD curriculum, our results indicate that greater institutional support, including faculty development and early curricular integration, is required. Further study should explore reasons for gaps between interest and participation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".